Problem 1: Acorn issues and how to get them resolved.

1. Problem: "Inform" requests regarding problems with or needed enhancements to Acorn go ignored or are closed with no action taken.

2. Why it is a problem: The library administration has indicated that they do not want lots of time to be spent in "tweaking" or repairing Acorn. Those of us that use Acorn for most of our work submit "Inform" requests about problems or needed enhancements, partly because discussion about these issues is no longer encouraged in committees. These range from requests that would make our work more efficient to broad customer service issues such as how the system handles diacritics. These requests are generally not given very prompt attention. There are Inform requests in the system that are pending or active dating back to Dec. 2003. There are other requests that have been "closed" simply because LITS feels that they cannot do anything about them. We sometimes are not informed about these closures.

3. Suggested solution: We need a mechanism for recording "known Acorn issues" and keeping up with them. We also need to have staff time allocated to work on these requests, which deal with very real problems or possible improvements. When items that are never going to get any attention are "closed," we need better communication about why.

4. People involved: LITS.

• * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Problem 2: Misleading call number displays in keyword search results lists.

1. Problem: In Webcat keyword search results lists, a call number is displayed with each entry. This becomes a problem for serials. The call number displayed is taken from just one of the call records attached to the bib, and the display includes the numerical and chronological designation in that call record. For example, do a keyword title search on "cultura politica democracia." The tenth item down is "La cultura politica de la democracia en Colombia." The call number shown is JL2881 .C858 2006. It looks as if we have only the 2006 issue of this serial, but that is not true--we also have the 2004. This situation holds for any serial that we have more than one issue of.

2. Why it is a problem: This was reported as a problem by Paula Covington, who had received a complaint from Mitchell Seligson, a prominent faculty member. Students using this and other similar titles from Vanderbilt's Latin American Public Opinion Project (which Seligson is a main man in) were confused by this sort of thing. Seligson requested, and Paula forwarded the request, that we catalog each issue of these serials as a monograph to avoid this problem. This is unreasonable, but the complaint itself is reasonable. It is in fact misleading to give the specific, full call number for just one issue in the keyword results list. That a faculty member complained about this situation and was led to suggest an unwieldy and irregular work-around supports seeing it as a genuine problem.

3. Suggested solution: The numerical/chronological designation in the call number for a serial issue is subfielded by $z. If possible, suppress the display of the $z subfield in the keyword results list, for serial records only. Then the call number would show only as JL2881 .C858, which covers all issues. This would not solve all our problems--some serials have call records in two entirely different call numbers, for example--but it would help in most cases. This suggestion was sent to LITS via an "Inform" request and Dale, if I remember correctly, said the solution seemed possible. It has been some time since I heard anything from him, however.

4. People involved: LITS; possibly Research Services?